Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard

	SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 7 days and sections whose most recent comment is older than 90 days.

Translate this header

Welcome to the VRT noticeboard

This page is where users can communicate with Commons Volunteers Response Team members. (For VRT agents to communicate with one another please use VRT wiki.) You can request permissions verification here, or anything else that needs an agent's assistance. This page is multilingual — when discussing tickets in languages other than English, please make a note of this and consider asking your question in the same language.

Please read the Frequently Asked Questions before posting your question here.

The current backlog of the (English) permissions-commons queue is: 3 days (graph)  update

Start a new discussion

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 2008 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

VRT Noticeboard

Main VRT-related pages

• Commons:Volunteer Response Team
• Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard
• Commons:Email templates
• {{subst:PP}} (Permission pending)

COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES

• Commons Help desk
• Village pump (general discussion)
  • Copyright
  • Proposals
  • Technical
• Graphics and photography discussion
  • Photography critiques
  • Image improvement
    • Illustration workshop
    • Map workshop
    • Photography workshop
    • Video and sound workshop
• Categories for discussion
• Undeletion requests
• Deletion requests
• Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard
• Translators' noticeboard
• Work requests for bots

---

• Contact administrators
  • Vandalism
  • User problems (Dispute resolution)
  • Blocks and protections
• Bureaucrats' noticeboard
• CheckUser requests
• Oversight requests

---

• Telegram
• IRC ^webchat
• Commons mailing list (archive)
• Commons' bugs on Phabricator

Shortcuts: Commons:VRT/N • Commons:VRTN

Category:Album covers by YG Entertainment (ticket:2013102510001373)

1. Is it okay to upload high-resolution versions of these album covers? (e.g. replace File:2NE1 2nd Mini Album Cover.jpg with this one from Apple Music)
2. Please check which artists have been approved in the OTRS ticket, and whether it's acceptable to upload other albums by the same artists that have not been uploaded yet. Is uploading allowed only for these six artists—2NE1, Big Bang, Winner, Se7en, Blackpink, and Jennie—or are there additional approved artists? (Winner and Blackpink did not debut in 2013.) Are all albums released under the name of YG Entertainment authorized for upload regardless of the release date? (If that's the case, what happens in the case of albums released in collaboration with another company, rather than just YG Entertainment?)--Namoroka (talk) 10:22, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Okay.. I found files for discussion at enwiki in 2022 and it seems that every album covers published by YG Entertainment after October 25, 2013 is allowed. However, this still seems like an incredibly wild claim. Many users are unaware of this fact and are still uploading files on local wiki under fair use.--Namoroka (talk) 10:40, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Namoroka, I would say that the ticket is invalid or at least clarification is needed from YG Entertainment. We recieved permission release in 2013 but it was not verified/finalised. Krd, Xia and MdsShakil, do you have any comments to add? Looking at search results it is used on 61 files. I checked a few and they seem to be added by non-VRT users. Ratekreel (talk) 11:02, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Please also check previous talks: Commons:Volunteer_Response_Team/Noticeboard/archive/2022#ticket:2013102510001373, Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard/archive/2016#File:E (Big Bang album).jpg, Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard/archive/2024#Ticket:2013102510001373, en:User talk:Ygent ebiz, Special:ListFiles/Ygent ebiz--Namoroka (talk) 11:11, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

I have sent an inquiry to YG Entertainment for clear confirmation.--Namoroka (talk) 11:43, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

It's been a week since I sent a request to YG Entertainment, but I have yet to receive a response. (Perhaps, unlike in 2013, they are no longer interested in Wikipedia.) On en:User talk:Ygent ebiz, Teemeah (now Xia) inquired whether the request could be applied to other projects besides the local Hungarian Wikipedia, but Teemeah was unable to get a response due to a full mailbox. At that time, Teemeah was already aware of the ambiguity about the email. In my opinion, unless specific usage requirements are stated in the current VTRS ticket, the ticket should not be considered valid. The English Wikipedia community also raised doubts about the validity of the ticket. As long as YG Entertainment does not clearly specify, this issue will likely persist on and on. The phrase "YG Entertainment allows the use of YG Entertainment album covers ..." may seem clear, but it is actually very ambiguous. It's unclear whether this applies to albums of music groups that did not exist in 2013, albums released by subsidiaries of YG Entertainment, or albums co-produced by YG Entertainment and other companies.--Namoroka (talk) 03:44, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Has YG Entertainment responded yet? JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 05:53, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

The Blackpink and Jennie examples you mention is due to simplicity, not because they have been relicensed by YG Entertainment. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 05:03, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I understand that. But the current VTRS ticket is still unclear. If we cannot received any clarification from YG, I think we should not use these album covers (for 2NE1, Big Bang & Seven).--Namoroka (talk) 08:05, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Just adding this here: w:WP:FFD/2022 November 25#File:Square One - Blackpink.jpg, an additional discussion on the English Wikipedia in November–December 2022. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 23:09, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

@Nemoralis how is this resolved?  $999$REAL 💬 ⬆   18:14, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

As far as I can see, an email was sent to YG Entertainment in January, 4 months ago, but they haven't responded. There's no question left here that VRT members hasn't answered. Nemoralis (talk) 22:38, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

@JohnCWiesenthal, I noticed that the template has been removed by you. What is the question that remains unanswered by the VRT agents? Nemoralis (talk) 13:24, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

As 999real mentioned above, this inquiry has not yet been resolved; so, why add a template claiming it has? JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 14:05, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

It seems that VRT provided all the information it can for now. The community can decide to keep or delete the files with that information, it's not up to VRT and this is not the venue for it. whym (talk) 12:04, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

[T]his is not the venue for it.

Which venue would be more suitable for this discussion? JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 17:24, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

You seem to believe there is something more to discuss, but the rest of us (Nemoralis and me at least) don't see what that is.

A possible next stage I can think of is deletion discussion, which you can start at COM:DR. What else, if that's not what you want? This is not a rhetorical question. And just saying "this discussion" is too vague. whym (talk) 09:48, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Kind of Bloop album cover.png

The permission from the person who created the cover art is at ticket:2025052010011304. However, since this might be a work for hire, I wonder if I also need to seek permission from Andy Baio to address the possibility that he owns the copyright. prospectprospekt (talk) 02:56, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

The permission letter must come from the copyright owner. Nemoralis (talk) 10:21, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Some significant additional context here that Baio was threatened with a lawsuit over this cover at the time, it being a derivative work of the original Miles Davis album cover: https://waxy.org/2011/06/kind_of_screwed/ Belbury (talk) 10:53, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

I think that the "set of comparison images" mentioned in the ticket refers to the one at the bottom of that blog post; accordingly, I have uploaded that as File:Kind of Bloop comparison images.png. prospectprospekt (talk) 02:40, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

@Krd I wonder what problems the ticket has that I assume caused you to delete both of the images. prospectprospekt (talk) 03:05, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

@Prospectprospekt, no response to VRT's question. Nemoralis (talk) 16:26, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

What was the question? prospectprospekt (talk) 18:03, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

We cannot disclose what was privately discussed with the permission sender. If possible pease encourage them to reply or to send the permission again. Krd 06:04, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

@Krd, @Nemoralis: Can I least know what vital information the ticket is missing that made you ask the question? This is because I fear that you might be asking for information that is already known. prospectprospekt (talk) 04:47, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

@Prospectprospekt, file's name or URL on Wikimedia Commons. Nemoralis (talk) 12:25, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

@Nemoralis: That information is useless because they can't see what the files depict. At least for File:Kind of Bloop album cover.png, the given information should be sufficient; in my initial email to them, I included a link to an archived version of the original cover art on the Kind of Bloop website, and in their reply, they make it clear that they know what they are granting permission for—the original cover art is what was subject to the fair use controversy. You should be able to verify this information by looking at the ticket, which should contain both my email to them and their reply. prospectprospekt (talk) 13:21, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

@Nemoralis Can you check if the permission sender has sent a second ticket to permissions-commons? prospectprospekt (talk) 03:35, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Event photos of models

It is alleged that Commons images and x.com images share some features (subjects, event names, angles, captions, etc), that they must have been taken by the same person, and that we need to follow COM:VRT and confirm the identity via email. This concerns hundreds of pictures tagged and linked at User talk:Bject now, including File:Trend Girls Photo Session (May 4, 2025)IMG 4472.jpg.

I looked into the allegation, asked some questions at User_talk:Bject#File:Trend_Girls_Photo_Session_(May_4,_2025)IMG_4472.jpg, and left with confusion and disagreement over what I think as simple facts. Or perhaps I might be missing something obvious. I hope to get a fresh perspective that will hopefully guide us to a resolution. Here is my summary of what the disagreement is:

The uploader User:Bject claims

• that they are not the same pictures, although there might be similarities if they were taken from the same angle
• that the uploader is not the person behind the x.com account

The tagger User:Alachuckthebuck claims

• that some of them are the same pictures, and/or have exact matches
• that captions match and it adds to the suspicion (that images might have been stolen)
• that the x.com account and the uploader here are likely to be the same person

My opinion is that the tagger's claim is not well substantiated, at least not to the level where VRT can start working on from. I have not seen any previous publication that have pixel-level matches to Commons files listed at the talk page. Similarities in captions are very weak evidence to claim the associated images might have been stolen. I asked for links, and got only one, which didn't show an exact match in my opinion. What do you think? whym (talk) 03:53, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

At least the example of File:Trend Girls Photo Session (May 4, 2025)IMG 4472.jpg that was apparently matched to https://x.com/stonefree_part6/status/1921401301625196914/photo/2 is a false positive. This is easily visible on the hair patterns and the finger positions (the hair falls differently, the fingers are closer together in our upload). Stemming from my experiences as hobby photographer, I would say that these images, assuming that they were taken sequentially, were shot with maybe less than one to a few seconds in between. It's also possible that the model is proficient enough to get into the same position within a few millimetres when resuming her pose, but the wrinkles on the bikini, IMHO virtually unchanged, make a serial exposure more likely. We could discuss concise Twitter-Commons image pairs, maybe on COM:VPC, but the circumstances do not really point towards pure NETCOPYVIOs. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 04:18, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

When looking for NETCOPYVIOs or duplicates, it's always sensible to look for intricate details while making comparisons: hairs, scales (in animals), pavement and vegetation patterns, the form and quantity of reflections (like in eyes or windows); in short everything that is easily moved out of position by even slight movements of or in the motif or where minute angle changes of the camera change the perception of e.g. the perspective on a pavement. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 04:25, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

The claim that the uploader is not the person behind the X account seems weird. Has anyone asked them straight out, "Is the X account using photos you took?" It's not just that it looks like an image taken seconds later (at most), but that it looks like it's taken by someone the same height and with the exact same lens, the same exposure settings, the same aperture, etc. - Jmabel ! talk 00:17, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Ah, I may have operated under a misunderstanding, looking for whether images are identical and nothing else. I think that it is quite obvious that the owner of the Wikimedia account "Bject" is also owner of the Twitter account "@stonefree_part6". But that is IMHO mostly irrelevant - as long as any relevant image was not published first on Twitter. Only that was my point: the Twitter image is different from the Commons upload. Furthermore, by the fact that there are quite complete EXIF available here points toward a legitimate upload (Twitter removes them, as far as I'm aware). Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 02:41, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. Can I conclude that while there is some doubt on the uploader's claims, there is nothing VRT should do about it for now, unless true duplicated publication outside of Commons is found?

I notified the two users using user talk page. It looks like they don't have further comment to add so far. whym (talk) 08:26, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

It appears ticket:2025051610000477 is related to this discussion. Krd 09:10, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

私が投稿した画像を削除したことに不服を申し立てます。似ているだけの画像が削除され、加えてなぜ全く違う場所や投稿日のものも巻き添えなのでしょうか。I am complaining about the deletion of the image I posted. Why are images that are merely similar being deleted, and why are images from completely different locations and posting dates also being deleted?--Bject (talk) 14:56, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

@Krd Do you have any response? whym (talk) 12:45, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Sadly not, but I don't even understand the question. Can you help? Krd 06:03, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

I think Bject wants you to explain the deletion of File:Trend Girls Photo Session (May 4, 2025)IMG 4472.jpg and other similarly-named files you speedy-deleted along with it on June 16 (and presumably, what it takes to undelete them). This is about more than 100 files deleted practically at the same time, if I recall it correctly. whym (talk) 09:50, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

remove mandatory username verification from username policy

Dear all, please see: Commons:Village pump/Proposals#remove mandatory username verification from username policy --Krd 14:35, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Igeldo historia eta istorioak cc-by-sa.pdf

Hello,

The file in question was deleted, even though it clearly stated the licensing terms—both within the document itself and in the VRT ticket (2025020710006565). We cannot see any discussion regarding the deletion, as the file has already been removed.

According to the discussion on this end (Thuresson, Theklan), we’ve learned that an email was sent to the author, Jabier Iraola, and since he did not respond, the image was deleted. The issue is that Jabier Iraola is not comfortable with email communication and does not understand any English at all. He most likely deleted the email thinking it was just spam.

I would kindly ask you to inform us about the current status of the file and whether it would be possible to restore it, as the document itself already contains the relevant licensing information.

Many thanks! Xabier Cañas (talk) 11:46, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

@Mussklprozz. Nemoralis (talk) 16:01, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Hola @Xabier y @Nemoralis, el problema son las docenas de imágenes de origen desconocido que aparecen en el libro. No está claro y es poco probable que el autor tenga todos los derechos de uso. – The problem are the dozens of images of unclear provenience which appear in the book. It is unclear and unlikely that the author holds the full rights to all of them.

Cheers, un saludo, Mussklprozz (talk) 20:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

P. S.: La communicación con Xabier Iraola en el ticket era en castellano. – The ticket communication with Xabier Iraola was in Castilian Spanish. Mussklprozz (talk) 20:58, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Dear all,@Nemoralis @Mussklprozz

I believe the core issue lies in the assumption that the images in this work are of unknown origin, and therefore possibly not legitimate. However, this is not the case. This is a book authored by Jabier Iraola. In the printed edition of the book—which was officially published in physical format—the license under which both the texts and the images are released is clearly stated on the second page. Unfortunately, we cannot verify this at the moment, as the file has been deleted from Commons. That license, embedded in the book itself, is Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-SA), and it explicitly applies to both the text and the images.

To provide some background that may help clarify the situation: Jabier Iraola has spent over 60 years photographing his hometown—its houses, farmhouses, families, festivities, and landscapes. This lifelong vocation was inherited from his father. Alongside his photographic work, he kept handwritten notes over the years. With the support of the local neighborhood council (herri kontseilua), and despite not being familiar with digital technologies (he only writes by hand), he has published this book combining a selection of his photographs and local stories. We would very much appreciate it if this context could be taken into account when reconsidering the status of the file.

Many thanks for your time and understanding.Xabier Cañas (talk) 06:20, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

I don't doubt you that that the architectural photos, etc., are all his or his father's but there are a lot of photos of individuals that do not look to me like they were taken by one or two photographers. There are also a fair number of posters (over 7 pages of them).

I would think that with clarification from the author, the bulk of this book could indeed be hosted on Commons, but it does look to me like there is some problematic content. - Jmabel ! talk 16:04, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Dear @Jmabel. Do you have another source for those images you think are problematic or that Jabier Iraola doesn't have permission to publish? Thanks. Theklan (talk) 16:26, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

I have nothing, and I have little knowledge of Euskara so I'm not the one to get involved here. I was just going by photographic style. - Jmabel ! talk 22:07, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Hola Xabier, thanks for your efforts. I have now written a reminder to Xabier Iraola (in Spanish, of course), asking him whether he personally took all those photos. I have also offered him to help him to black out the photos for which the legal status is unclear. I really appreciate if we can publish this book again, but we need an answer from him.

Are you in contact with him, and can offer direct help?

Cheers, Mussklprozz (talk) 19:19, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Vielen Danke @Mussklprozz for your message and for reaching out directly to Jabier Iraola in Spanish.

Yes, I’m in contact with him, and I’ll do my best to follow up. He mentioned that he has received something recently, so I’ll help him understand it and respond appropriately. As I mentioned earlier, he doesn’t use email regularly and is not used to dealing with online procedures, so I’ll try to guide him through the process as clearly as possible. Xabier Cañas (talk) 15:33, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

ticket:2025052410001148 – Still pending after 3 weeks

Hello again,

I’m following up once more on ticket #2025052410001148. The permission email was originally sent on May 24th regarding images authored by Suzana Loewen (Nathor). A topic was previously opened here and marked as resolved, but the VRT team has not confirmed the ticket yet and no images have been restored.

Today, I have resent the permission email to permissions-pt@wikimedia.org with all relevant information and files.

Could someone from the team please check if this ticket is being processed, or let us know if any action is required on our side?

Thank you very much for your support.

David Olinger Berndt (talk) 16:19, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Demande de suivi du ticket #20250604010011441 – logo Parti Marocain Libéral

Bonjour, Je souhaite savoir si mon ticket VRT **#20250604010011441** concernant le fichier `File:Logo party sansbg.png` – logo officiel du **Parti Marocain Libéral** – est toujours en cours de traitement ?

La permission a été transmise par **Isaac Charia** (secrétaire général du parti) et la licence CC‑BY‑SA 4.0 est déjà en place. Y aurait‑il des éléments supplémentaires à fournir pour finaliser la validation ?

Merci beaucoup à la VRT pour son travail et votre aide ! --Imoumen (talk) 18:36, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Template:GoO-donation

This concerns Template:GoO-donation. There is a also a previous thread of the same thing at COM:VPC. That too was started by me. I thought that it would be resolved after that. But I came across the template today only to see that its still the same. Naveen Patnaik demitted office in June 2024. We need to remove his personal accounts from the OTRS permission as he longer is a part of the govt. There is also a need of proper clarification that works released only till the time he was in office can be uploaded or kept. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 05:29, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

What do you mean by "his personal accounts"? Nemoralis (talk) 13:48, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Photo Upload via VRT Release Generator

A few days ago, I contacted a photographer who agreed to release some photos of Orford Musique. I asked for help with the process, and in the end, he himself attached the files to the email generated here. So I’m wondering: how long will it take for the photos to be available on Wikipedia? How can I find the photos once they are published? Could I find them just by searching "Orford Musique" even if that’s not the file name, given that the metadata information might include those details? If he doesn’t have a Wikipedia account and sent the email for the photos to be published, under which account will the photos be uploaded? Goo064s (talk) 02:58, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

At best the copyright holder uploads the files themselves, or you upload the file for them. Krd 10:50, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Krd 10:50, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

Several images have had the permission pending tag for almost a month.

The images at Category:Undefeated (band) have been pending permission for almost a month. The band (specifically Meredith) said that they submitted the permission forms. Could a volunteer check to see if the permissions were actually submitted correctly? Thanks.--3family6 (talk) 20:40, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

I can only find one email received regarding images in that category - more specifically regarding File:Undefeated Promo Photo.jpg. VRT has replied back to the sender asking which file they were speaking about (they didn't mention the file name or link, but I can now identify the image based on the content of the email/attachments). I've replied once again to the sender regarding some follow up questions regarding their release. Regarding the other images, I can't find any emails/tickets. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 21:07, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Okay, I'll try and follow up about the other images. Thank you!3family6 (talk) 23:10, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Krd 10:48, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Manfred Ball Portrait.jpg

Hi, could a German-speaking VRT member quickly check the ticket related to this DR? Best, ChemSim (talk) 18:30, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Ticket is incomplete. Krd 02:46, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Krd 02:46, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

File:Ariel Sharon official portrait (D644-090) (cropped).jpg

... is currently nominated for deletion. There are a bunch of Israeli press VRT tickets which may cover it, possibly including ticket:2023021510005812. Do any agents have the means to take a look? JayCubby (talk) 19:09, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Ticket is in Hebrew. However, it was clear through Google Translate that the ticket cleared the release for File:Isaac Herzog, July 2021 (D1233-049).JPG only. Robertsky (talk) 13:49, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Ticket is in Hebrew. However, the ticket cleared the release for File:Isaac Herzog, July 2021 (D1233-049).JPG only. Robertsky (talk) 13:50, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Robertsky (talk) 13:49, 2 July 2025 (UTC)